Lord Drayson: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Dr John Reid) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 16 December 2004 (Official Report, Commons; col. 1798), as part of the wider programme to modernise the UK's defence capabilities, the then Secretary of State for Defence, the right honourable Geoff Hoon MP, announced to the House the Government's intention to create two new units that would significantly improve the specialist support to the Special Forces and enhance our global capacity to fight terrorism.
	The first of these new units, the Special Reconnaissance Regiment, became operational in April 2005 and is already delivering a globally deployable special reconnaissance capability to the UK Special Forces. The second new unit is the "Special Forces Support Group". SFSG is an enhanced capability that will directly support UK Special Forces intervention operations around the world and provide the UK with an additional counter-terrorist capability.
	I am pleased to be able to inform the House today that the SFSG has now stood up in St Athan, near Cardiff, and achieved initial operating capability as planned on 3 April. Personnel for the new unit have been drawn from the Parachute Regiment, the Royal Marines, and the Royal Air Force Regiment. The unit will be part of the UK Special Forces Group.
	The principal role of the SFSG is to provide direct support to UKSF intervention operations, as well as reinforcing UKSF in other key capability areas such as provision of specialist training and support to domestic CT operations. It will have a specific specialist infantry role and personnel will be equipped and trained accordingly.

Lord Triesman: My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary (Mr Jack Straw) and Sir John Grant (UK Permanent Representative to the EU) represented the UK at the General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) in Luxembourg on 10 April. My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for International Development (Mr Gareth Thomas) represented the UK for the half-day of discussions on 11 April.
	The agenda items covered on 10 April were as follows:
	Inter-Institutional Agreement (IIA)
	The presidency briefed the council on progress towards an inter-institutional agreement with the European Parliament on the 2007-13 financial perspective.
	World Trade Organisation/Doha Development Agenda
	Commissioner Mandelson briefed the council on discussions with Brazil and the US in Rio de Janeiro.
	A number of member states spoke in support of the Commission and the economic importance of a deal.
	A special session of the council will be convened, if necessary, in the margins of negotiations in Geneva towards the end of April.
	Sustainable Development
	The council had a discussion with a view to helping the presidency prepare a renewed EU sustainable development strategy to be adopted at the June European Council.
	In June 2005, the European Council adopted a declaration on guiding principles for sustainable development based on the four principles of: environmental protection, social equity and cohesion; economic prosperity; and meeting international responsibilities. In December 2005, it looked forward to adopting in June 2006 an ambitious and comprehensive strategy, comprising targets, indicators and an effective monitoring procedure, integrating the internal and external dimensions and based on a positive long-term vision, bringing together the Community's sustainable development priorities and objectives.
	Belarus
	The presidency recalled the serious shortcomings in the conduct of the presidential election of 19 March and the council's agreement at its meetings on 7 November 2005 and 30 January 2006 to take action if the election was not conducted according to international standards.
	There was broad support in the council for a firm EU response to the elections. Ministers agreed to adopt a visa ban, and possible further targeted measures, against President Lukashenko, the Belarusian leadership and officials responsible for the violations of international human rights law.
	There was agreement in the council that these restrictive measures should be complemented by greater EU support for students, the opposition and greater engagement with civil society.
	The council adopted conclusions deploring the presidential elections as neither free nor fair, condemning the violence used by the Belarusian authorities against demonstrators and arrests of members of the opposition and implementing restrictive measures against those responsible for the violations of international electoral standards as well as the crackdown on civil society and democratic opposition.
	Ukraine
	The council discussed the situation in Ukraine following the 26 March parliamentary elections including the ongoing attempts to form a new government.
	The council noted that the elections had consolidated the democratic breakthrough in Ukraine and provided a strong basis for renewed efforts to move forward key reforms. External Relations Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner said that talks on an enhanced agreement to succeed the partnership and co-operation agreement should support Ukraine's reform process.
	Middle East Peace Process
	Foreign Ministers discussed the current situation on the ground. There was broad consensus among the council on the principle that the EU should be firm in its policy towards Hamas while maintaining the EU's commitment to help meet the Palestinian people's basic needs. Ministers also endorsed the Commission's temporary suspension of direct funding to the Palestinian Authority. This is a precautionary measure, pending conclusion of a review of EU assistance to the Palestinians. Aid to support basic human needs including health and education of the Palestinian people would continue.
	The council agreed conclusions expressing grave concern at the Palestinian Government's failure to commit itself to the quartet principles; urging the government to meet and implement these principles and to commit to President Abbas' platform of peace and outlining the EU's review of assistance against the government's commitment to these principles.
	Iran
	High Representative Solana presented a paper that set out options for future EU policy towards Iran. The council agreed conclusions calling on Iran to fulfil International Atomic Energy Agency Board/UN requirements to suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, welcoming the conclusions of the 30 March Ministerial in Berlin and underlining the EU's continued concern about the human rights situation in Iran.
	AOB: UN Reform
	The council had a brief discussion on the implementation of the outcome of the 2005 UN World Summit. Several member states emphasised the important role the EU should continue to play in the reform process.
	The council adopted conclusions welcoming the adoption of the resolution to establish the Human Rights Council as an essential element in further strengthening the UN human rights machinery as well as being an important step forward in the UN reform process.
	AOB: Flooding in the Danube
	Member states were briefed on the floods in central and south-east Europe. Some of the worst-affected member states were examining the possibility of applying for EU assistance under the solidarity fund.
	AOB: High-level Meeting on a Single Free Trade Area in South-east Europe
	Romania briefed the council on the decision at the high-level meeting on 6 April in Bucharest to launch negotiations on a regional free trade agreement on the basis of a central Europe free trade agreement.
	AOB: South-east Turkey
	The Netherlands raised the recent demonstrations in south-east Turkey.
	The agenda items covered on 11 April were as follows:
	10th European Development Fund (EDF): Internal Agreement and Financial Protocol
	The presidency opened by recalling the December 2005 agreement of the European Council for a 10th EDF of €22.682 billion, and emphasising that member states now needed to transfer this into an operational framework.
	Development Ministers discussed the Commission's proposals to top-up the €22.682 billion figure with additional resources to fund (1) activities in overseas countries and territories and (2) the Commission's administrative costs associated with the implementation of the EDF. The matter was referred back to COREPER by the presidency for further discussion and decision. The Commission also updated the council on the implementation of the Africa strategy and on Commission activities which were being undertaken as part of the strategy. Member states raised a number of points in response, including a request for the Commission to regularly update the council on progress.
	Aid Effectiveness Package
	Updated Common Framework for Country Strategy Papers
	EU Aid: Delivering more, better, faster
	Monterrey Report
	Policy Coherence for Development
	The council adopted the conclusions on aid effectiveness. There was agreement to continue the good progress towards meeting EU aid volume goals and to move, on a voluntary basis, towards more joint work on country programmes between Commission and member states, based on a common framework for country strategies.
	The presidency noted the Commission's rolling work programme for policy coherence for development (PCD) and, following a brief exchange of views, the council adopted conclusions on the PCD reaffirming the importance of policy coherence, inviting member states and the Commission to develop a more detailed rolling work programme by June 2006 and highlighting specific priority areas for action and a timetable on PCD.
	Reform of Humanitarian Assistance: exchange of views
	The presidency opened the discussion by recognising the scope for better coordination between the areas of crisis management/civilian protection and humanitarian assistance. Development Ministers drew attention to various areas, including the UN's Central Emergency Revolving Fund; the idea of a humanitarian ombudsman or an annual global report on humanitarian assistance; the role of the Peace Building Commission in providing assistance beyond the initial humanitarian response; and the need for greater coherency between the Commission and Council. The presidency will organise an event on humanitarian assistance to further discussion.
	AOB: UN Reform
	Development Ministers discussed their priorities and ideas for UN reform, including a three pillar approach (humanitarian, development and environmental), streamlining of UN agencies, the four 'Ones' principle (in each country one office, one leader, one programme and one budget line) and more predictable funding for the UN. The presidency will host a meeting in Vienna on 9 June to discuss UN reform and system-wide coherence more broadly. Several member states are represented on the Secretary-General's panel.
	Signature of the Internal Agreement on Procedures
	In the margins of the council the Internal Agreement on Procedures, one of the implementing documents for the revised Cotonou agreement, was signed by Development Ministers.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Andy Burnham) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Identity and Passport Service will publish its corporate and business plans for 2006–16 and framework agreement on Friday 21 April. Copies of the documents will be placed in the Library of the House.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My honourable friend the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality (Tony McNulty) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Government have previously made Statements on the return of failed asylum seekers to Zimbabwe on 27 June, 6 and 18 July and 14 December 2005. I would like to provide a further update.
	On 12 April the Court of Appeal allowed our appeal against two determinations of the asylum and immigration tribunal (AIT). The court found that the asylum and immigration tribunal had erred in its approach to the evidence before it in finding that the particular way we were enforcing returns of failed Zimbabwean asylum seekers to Harare airport put them at risk of mistreatment. The AIT's determination in that case has therefore been set aside and the AIT will consider the case afresh.
	We also welcome the Court of Appeal's further finding that a person who can safely return to their country of origin voluntarily is not a refugee. The Government remain deeply concerned about the human rights situation in Zimbabwe and we are fully committed to providing protection to those who need it. For those who do, the asylum decision-making and independent appeals system ensure that they get an appropriate form of protection, and the question of their removal does not arise. But it cannot be right that people who would face no risk if they returned to their country of origin voluntarily should, because they refuse to do so, be entitled to the same status as people who have a genuine fear of persecution.
	In line with our original undertaking to the High Court, we will not be enforcing returns to Zimbabwe pending the further hearing that the asylum and immigration tribunal is now required to hold. However, we continue to expect those who have exhausted their rights of appeal and been found not to need international protection to leave the UK voluntarily. We can if required assist them in doing so through the International Organization for Migration (IOM).
	Since the tribunal hearing of October 2005, we have been reviewing our methods of return, and have continued to build upon our already strong networks and relationships with NGOs, international organisations and civil society on the ground in Zimbabwe to strengthen our capacity to monitor the treatment of both enforced and voluntary returnees.

Lord Drayson: My honourable friend the Parliamentary-Under Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Don Touhig) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Honourable members will wish to be aware that with effect from 1 April 2006, the Naval Recruiting and Training Agency (NRTA), the Army Training and Recruiting Agency (ATRA), and the Royal Air Force Training Group Defence Agency (TGDA) will cease to hold agency status.
	This change is being made to facilitate the individual services' plans for restructuring their headquarters and to improve the cohesion of training between training individuals and training formed units. It also seeks to recognise the changes taking place as a result of the implementation of programmes such as the defence training review which aim to rationalise the services' specialist training to achieve improvements in its delivery and to meet the increasing requirement for joint operations. We take our duty-of-care responsibilities very seriously and the well-being of our personnel remains fundamental to the core values and standards of the Armed Forces and the establishments responsible for training them. I am confident that these changes will both contribute towards a more joined-up approach to tri-service training and the achievement of broader efficiencies. These changes will have no impact on the current initiatives to improve the arrangements for the care and well-being of recruits. They are part of a package of broader measures that seek to improve all aspects of individual training capability. I also wish to stress that the recent report by Nicholas Blake QC has had no influence on this decision.
	I will ensure that the key benefits of agency status such as customer focus and strong performance management will be carried forward under the new arrangements. We will continue to publish information about the work of the successor organisations and be proactive in releasing information under the Freedom of Information Act.